Live data from Hacker News

Bloomberg bankrolls a social-media army

wsj.com

551–553 of 553 posts

Re: Bloomberg bankrolls a social-media army

#551

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The courts never made a ruling on whether those Congressional subpoenas were legally binding—in fact, when one of the people subpoenaed tried to take that question to federal court, the House instead chose to withdraw the subpoena. I’m also not sure what Trump’s tax returns have to do with checks and balances between the Congress and the President. Setting those things aside, claiming that Congress doesn’t act as a c…

No; you're attempting to evade the central point by changing the argument to a typical Republican/Democratic slugfest. I don't care about the merits of Congressional prerogatives here, which is an entirely secondary point. The point is that the Founding Fathers believed that Congress would defend its own prerogatives against the executive. This has been proven false: a model where government is dominated by partisan…

> you're attempting to evade the central point by changing the argument to a typical Republican/Democratic slugfest.

I wasn't intending to.

> I don't care about the merits of Congressional prerogatives here, which is an entirely secondary point. The point is that the Founding Fathers believed that Congress would defend its own prerogatives against the executive. This has been proven false.... Congress is driven by the needs of the political parties who happen to be running it at the time, not as an institution in itself.

Got it, this is a better explanation and I think I agree with it.

Re: Bloomberg bankrolls a social-media army

#552
post #536

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I certainly agree that the two party system, and correspondingly, the first-part-the-post district system, is crippling the US political system. Proportional representation in Congress and some sort of ranked or approval voting system for the president and similar offices, would do a lot of good. I certainly think it'd be good if the Democratic and Republican parties both disappeared, but it's not true that both are…

I think I agree, but I wonder whether people actually want change. Hell, I hesitated myself when Sanders announced US-wise rent control.

The big obstacle is that everybody with power is afraid to lose it. A multi-party system would be much better at representing the will of the people, but to change that, the party in power will have to give up much of that power, and that's unlikely to happen. Especially in the current political climate.

Re: Bloomberg bankrolls a social-media army

#553
post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If Bloomberg gets elected the US is done. It's not longer anything resembling democracy and the only thing that will save us from the new order will be revolution. So being extremely wealthy and successful now disqualifies you from being a good President? Unlike our current super wealthy President, Bloomberg has more experience in government (mayor of NYC) and has a more successful track record in business. Money s…

> So being extremely wealthy and successful now disqualifies you from being a good President? Almost certainly yes. These people have out of control egos and little relevant experience. Bloomberg would be no different than Trump. Gates too.

Yeah I agree. Being mayor of NYC isn't relevant at all. He might as well have been peddling cocaine
Post reply on HN